Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)126[1]
Hellig contre Allemagne
Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme
(Requête no 20999/05, arrêt du 7 juillet 2011, définitif le 7 octobre 2011)
Le Comité des Ministres, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales, qui prévoit qu’il surveille l’exécution des arrêts définitifs de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (ci-après nommées « la Convention » et « la Cour »),
Vu l’arrêt définitif, qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité dans l’affaire ci-dessus et la violation constatée (voir document DH-DD(2012)360E) ;
Rappelant l’obligation de l’Etat défendeur, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 1, de la Convention, de se conformer aux arrêts définitifs dans les litiges auxquels il est partie et que cette obligation implique, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour, l’adoption par les autorités de l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire :
- de mesures individuelles pour mettre fin aux violations constatées et en effacer les conséquences,
dans la mesure du possible par restitutio in intergrum ; et
- de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables ;
Ayant invité le gouvernement de l’Etat défendeur à informer le Comité des mesures prises pour se conformer aux obligations susmentionnés ;
Ayant examiné le bilan d’action fourni par le Gouvernement indiquant les mesures adoptées afin d’exécuter l’arrêt y compris les informations fournies en ce qui concerne le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour (voir document DH-DD(2012)360E) ;
S’étant assuré que toutes les mesures requises par l’article 46, paragraphe 1, ont été adoptées ;
DECLARE qu’il a rempli ses fonctions en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention dans cette affaire et
DECIDE d’en clore l’examen.
Application of Hellig v. Federal Republic of Germany (no. 20999/05)
Report on the execution of the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
delivered on 7 July 2011 (final since 7 October 2011)
Action Plan / Action Report
1. Violation of the Convention determined by the Court
The case concerned the Application of a prisoner regarding his detainment in a security cell in prison without clothes for seven days. The Court considered the Applicant’s seven-day placement in the security cell in itself to have been justified by the special circumstances of the case. However, the Court concluded that there had been no sufficient reasons to justify such harsh treatment as the removal of the Applicant’s clothes for the entire duration of his placement in the cell.
2.Individual measures
The compensation awarded by the Court, totalling €13,500, was received on 5 January 2012 by the Applicant’s legal representative, who had submitted a power of attorney authorising him to receive the compensation sum awarded. Please find attached a photocopy of the relevant accounting entry.
3.General measures
a)In the Land of Hesse
Immediately after pronouncement, the Court’s Judgment was communicated to all prison authorities of the Land of Hesse – the Land where the violation of the Convention took place. The Prisons Sub-committee of the Parliament of the Land of Hesse (Landtag) was also informed of the Court’s Judgement.
On 12 July 2011, in its initial response to the Judgment, the Ministry of Justice of the Land of Hesse requested – in addition to the two easy-tear, non-woven paper covers already provided, one of which serves as a garment – the general provision by all prisons with immediate effect of a piece of underwear made from non-woven paper.
At the same time, a survey was carried out in the Laender which produced the following conclusion: Most Laender perceived a much lesser danger in the provision of garments to those at risk of suicide than that previously estimated in Hesse. Hamburg, Lower Saxony, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Saxony, Saarland and Thuringia provide normal tracksuits or similar garments, and in some cases even quilts or woollen blankets. Bavaria plans to introduce a rule to stipulate the provision – in addition to a piece of disposable underwear made from non-woven material – of a shirt and a cover, each made of tear-resistant material.
In Baden-Württemberg, aside from underwear made of non-woven material, some prisoners are given shirts made out of tear-proof, non-twistable material. However, such shirts have the disadvantage of being heavy, stiff and therefore very uncomfortable.
In keeping with the intent of the European Court of Human Rights, according to which particular value is to be ascribed to the protection of modesty, Hesse has decided – in addition to a cover and a piece of underwear made of non-woven paper – to provide prisoners with a paper shirt. Schleswig-Holstein has already had positive experience with this. On 17 October 2011, the prisons were therefore requested to follow this procedure.
b)Further general measures
A German translation of the judgment was sent to all the ministries of justice of the Laender for notification within their remit.
In addition to this, a German translation of the judgment was published in anonymous form on the website of the Federal Ministry of Justice in the Ministry’s case-law database (/egmr). Furthermore, the translation was sent to several important publishing houses that bring out legal periodicals.
Moreover, the judgment will be included in the report drawn up by the Federal Ministry of Justice, entitled Bericht über die Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte und die Umsetzung seiner Urteile in Verfahren gegen die Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Jahr 2011 (“Report on the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights and on the Execution of its Judgments in Cases against the Federal Republic of Germany in 2011”). This report is widely disseminated, and will be published on the Federal Ministry of Justice website at (Recht → Öffentliches Recht → Beauftragte für Menschenrechtsfragen). (/DE/Recht/OeffentlichesRecht/BeauftragteMenschenrechtsfragen/WichtigeUrteiledesEuropaeischenGerichtshofsfuerMenschenrechte/_node.html)
4.Conclusions
The government considers that no individual measure is required, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction; that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations, and that Germany has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
[1] Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 26 septembre 2012 lors de la 1150e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy